All of the references cited in the OA are about other people characterizing McCarthy's position. I have not seen any direct quote from her that indicates an opposition to the principle of vaccines or the efficacy of all vaccines. She is misguided in insisting that vaccines cause autism, but that is not the same thing as being against vaccination in general.
I think she is wrong to connect vaccines to autism. But attacking her personally is not necessary or relevant. Her general position that she is not against vaccines in general but only against un-safe vaccines is a valid position. Why bother nit-picking nuances or perceived contradictions in wording. It's all irrelevant. The only issue is: Are existing vaccines safe and could they be made safer? All else is nonsense.
He is one quater through his term. And he is through playing nice.
Leia directs this to Wilhuff Tarkin, not Lord Vader. Tarkin is a Grand Moff of the Galactic Empire and is in charge of the Death Star.
So the quote is:
"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
Research Triangle Park (Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill) is a larger tech hub than Austin. And the cost of living is lower as well. Don't know about average salaries.
Since LTS distributions are supported for 5 years, why would Gnome only be supported for 2 years?
And all that oil would be outside the EU then.
This would not be the first time distorted maps have been used for a political purpose. There is no reason use the Mercator projection on world maps except to make the northern hemisphere countries look much larger than those in Africa and South America near the equator. (Hint: Africa is enormous but is often shown as smaller than North America)
Exactly! A whining 5 year old in the back seat is more distracting than an image on Glass. You can't test every possible behavior before it is allowed in a car. The law should be that every driver is RESPONSIBLE for paying attention to the road. If I am being distracted by Glass, I have a duty to turn it off.
Why do you limit this to technology? What study has shown that it is safe to drive while eating a Big Mac? Are you going to test every possible behavior before it is allowed in a car? What about holding hands while driving? What about having kids in the back seat? Isn't that a distraction? I bet google glass is less distracting than a 5 year old in the back seat who is whining constantly.
There are plenty of questions about privacy and security raised by Google Glass but I think all products should be treated equally. I might be more distracted while driving by a Big Mac or a cigarette than by an image out of my field of view on Glass. This is too subjective a judgement to be made by politicians through the legislative process.
The important date is not when the actionable behavior took place (1994) or then the anti-trust action began (1998). The important question is "when was justice done?" and the only possible answer is NOT YET. Microsoft stole all it's online market share from the inventor of the browser, Netscape. The only reasonable justice would be to return their online market share to what it was in 1994. I think that was about 20%, if we are being charitable to M$. So M$ should have been banned from selling any product that accessed the internet until thier total market share returned to 20%. That has not happened... yet.
The internet is an inherently chaotic system with most of the computing power on the edges and very weak central controls. This is by design because it creates a stable, robust network. Individuals (first from universities) swarmed the internet in an explosion of creativity. They were followed by corporations as the net was opened to commercial activity. Government was late to the game and is only now coming to grips with how to use the internet for monitoring citizens.
As individuals moved online, there was certainly an increase in freedom to communicate. But now that "total information awareness " is upon us, we are less free. And in a way that's more dangerous than it was in 1984 because, at least until very recently, we did not know how limited our freedom was.
If there is a problem with voice calls bothering other people on a plane, why does the airline provide phones built into the seats. How does that differ from me using my cell phone? Oh yeah, I have to pay the airline to use their phone.
And does this new law ban calls from the airline owed phones? Well, thay ARE voice calls, and the airline phones are moving at 600 MPH so I guess that qualifies them as mobile divices.